 After a long offseason, we are so back baby. It is week one in the NFL with the season kicking off tonight between the Chiefs and the Lions, which means the week one NFL DFS main slate is just around the corner. We are here to break down that entire slate. We're going to talk injuries, we're going to talk game stacks, bookmaker info, past trends for roster construction and top plays for the week. Everything you could possibly need, hopefully fill out some good lineups over on Fandall.com. We're going to get you ready for week one right now. Welcome on into the heat check fantasy podcast right here on the Fandall podcast network and on Fandall research. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a managing editor of digital media for Fandall research. Joined here as always by Brandon Gedula. He is a senior managing editor for Fandall research and Brandon has been far too long since we've gotten to talk. How are you doing today? Oh, baby, we're scrambling. It's been a morning, it's been a, it's been about a 24 hour period. Now actually last year, the day before our first show and kickoff, my work computer died. So I was scrambling. I have all my spreadsheets on my like detailed stuff on there. And I had to try to do my best to get some stuff transferred over to the personal computer to, you know, as they say, the show goes on, you know, the podcast goes on. And of course, the day before football this season, your boy spilled coffee all over his desk, ruined his dock. So all of the plugins that go basically, because you know, you have a Mac book and they're on the USBC life with very minimal inputs. I got a lot of stuff to plug in, not enough places to plug it in too. So I think this confirmation that Macs are the worst, like we have work Macs and like I, if I didn't have to use it for work, I would never use a Mac. But like, I don't want to use a dock, I want to plug stuff in. Yeah, I only, now it looks like I got, I got like five things plugged into my, like every, every port is covered. I can't use my keyboard or my mouse because there's not enough, I don't, I mean, there's enough space, sorry, Mac, but I don't have like another USB to USB-C adapter. But like, as the clock was ticking, I found my backup one. So I got the camera up and running, but the frame was all off, so I've been sliding it forward. So anyone watching, it's going to look a little less professional. But hey, you know what, there's a reason that these NFL players get all these preseason reps, all this training camp in that way when it's kickoff, they're ready. We don't have that, Jim. It's a different world. We're not, you know, we're not pampered like that. We're not running, you know, practice podcasts. It's, you know, whatever comes, it's, it's, you know, it's like going out on Broadway without any rehearsals. I do got to correct you on one thing. You said the show goes on. It almost literally did not because I forgot to press record on the local, like the local recordings that I used for like our audio for the podcast version. So like the first 30 seconds, I'm going to pull from YouTube after the fact, because I literally forgot to press record. Now I think that's actually a good omen because I told you I'm going to forget something. And if I started off with that, like we're good. Like I've already gotten my forgetting out of the way early. So honestly, I feel like this will be, if you go from the four minute and 15 seconds mark on our best show of all time. Yeah. I mean, part of the reason that I won't even say I'm behind, but like I'm screaming, I didn't, I didn't think to look to find my, you know, other USB C adapter. It's one of those things. I see it all the time. And then it's like, when I finally need it, I don't know where it is in my office. I'm a bit messy. But no, the reason for all that is just the coffee thing. I spent as much time, if not more prepping for the, like the actual analysis of this, I put that all in front. I was like, you know what? If I got to, if I got to stream this from my phone, it's better that I spend the extra couple hours, you know, working on my, working on my analysis, running the Sims, looking at the matchups, looking at pace, all that kind of stuff. So anyone who's tuning out, which I'm sure is about half the listeners by now that I guess is a train wreck. Don't worry about the show. It's, it's everything leading in was, was a bit. Yeah, the analysis has never been wrong in our lives. That's the part we've always gotten right to a T what we're going to do for today. In case you are a new listener, a apologies, we're going to break down the week one NFL DFS main slate. Now focusing just in the main slate. It's not talking Thursday, Sunday, or Monday night, focusing instead on that main slate. If you want some thoughts on the Thursday night game between the chiefs and the lions, Tom Beckio previewed that game for us over on the covering the spread podcast feed as he will every Thursday prime time tops. We're going to call that as he gets you ready for the NFL Thursday night games every single week. That's again on the covering the spread podcast feed. You also mentioned people watching this. Well, Brandon, I got a delightful thing to tell you because people now have a new way to watch the heat check NFL show that is on fan dual TV plus. You can check out fan dual TV plus. My name is on fire, Apple TV, Roku and by going to fan dual.com slash watch. You can watch not just us, but also you can watch up in Adams by logging into your fan dual account. You can watch covering the spread everything all available right there, all in the exact same place, which I think means we're on the same level as K Adams. Just going to go ahead and you know, throw that out there for on the same platform. We're effectively equal. So shout out to our colleague K who is exactly on the same level as us. Sorry K to ruin your day before it even begins. As always, make sure you're subscribed to the number fire daily fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcasts. We're going to have the, the recap show still this year. We're going to cut it down a bit because it was running a bit long before previously and Brandon is a very busy guy. So that'll be just me on Mondays recapping what went down in NFL DFS and taking a look forward to the upcoming main slate as well. So that'll be in your podcast feed and on Fandall YouTube and Fandall TV plus as well. Final like logistical thing for this week is I know in the past people have asked us on Twitter about bringing the free roll back because we had a free roll a couple, right? No, it was a, it was a no rake entry. It was an entry fee like a listener league. Well, this one actually has no entry fee. If you want to enter into a free listener league for everyone celebrating Fandall research, go to Fandall.com slash research. You can find a link to the free roll up there. No entry fee $1,000 in total prizes for that one. So go to Fandall.com slash research. I should mention, I guess for the non people who come back for NFL, we have a new site called Fandall research. Probably should mention that. That's why I was stumbling over my title because I don't know what job I do. Fandall.com slash research to find all of our written analysis along with our podcast as well. Numberfire tools are still alive over on numberfire.com. So you can still use those. I was pulling projections from there yesterday. So it's still alive. You can go over there. But all the written content now on Fandall.com slash research. The NFL is back. I know. Jocker, right? And the best place to celebrate is on Fandall because right now all customers, all of them can get a no-sweat bet for week one. Just place a bet on any week one NFL game. You'll get bonus bets back if you don't win that on spreads, player props totals and more. So this is the Fandall sports book app and kick off the NFL season with America's number one sports book must be 21 plus and president select states refund issued is non-litrable bonus bets that expire seven days after a seat. Max refund $5 unless otherwise specified. Restrictions applies to terms at sportsbook.fandall.com. Fandall is offering online sports waging in Kansas under an agreement with Kansas Star Casino LLC. Gambling problem call 1-800-GAMBLER or visit Fandall.com slash RG in Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Tennessee, and Virginia. Call 1-800-NEXT-STEP protects NEXT-STEP to 5334-2 in Arizona. 1-888-789-7777 or visit ccpg.org slash chat in Connecticut. 1-800-9 with it in Indiana. 1-800-522-4700 visit casgamblinghealth.com in Kansas. 1-877-770 stop in Louisiana. MD gamblinghealth.org in Maryland. 1-800-GAMBLER.net in West Virginia or call 1-800-522-4700 in Wyoming. Hope is here. Visit gamblinghealthlinema.org or call 100-327-5050 for 24-7 support in Massachusetts. And in New York, 1-877-888-Hope and Why or text Hope and Why. Let's dig in now to the slate over here for week number one and finally get this podcast cranking 10 minutes into the show. Brandon, when you look at the week one NFL DFS main slate, what is the key thing that stands out to you as far as being the big decision point, key games to analyze, what to you is the biggest thing, the headliner for the week one main slate? Yeah, headliner for me is we're pretty much gifted two games, one specifically that's elevated from the rest with the chargers and the dolphins. That total was 50 and a half on Fandall Sportsbook and we also have the Bengals and Browns at 47 and a half and then 48 and a half now. Oh, we're in bed up, baby. Nice, love that. And then you just basically have a cluster of games. I mean, there's actually a few outliers below 40 or there abouts. But there's a big cluster of games between like 44 and 45 and a half and while every point point and a half matters for these purposes. You know, just kind of kind of like say there's a lot of games that we need to look into figure out which games can be the game. So basically, I think we have two obvious games. I think we need to figure out what's game three, where we going for for those mini stacks. Jim and I like to talk a lot about how much we like a game, whether it's a two QB game like where we have interest in both sides of the offense, including the quarterbacks, one quarterback. So you know, maybe one team has it or one quarterback is a little bit off the radar for us, even if the game environment's good. And sometimes it's a no quarterback game and it's just sort of the mini stacks that we're looking for. But trying to figure out which are those mini stack games we can get to. And honestly, the more I've been thinking about it, we'll talk about pace to with the chargers, although the dolphins always have a really frustrating pace. You know, making sure that we're high enough on the games that we want to be high enough on and not just look at games say, hey, chargers dolphins has included the building block, but how do you do it? Or we've been kind of skimming through some notes seems like maybe you're a little bit lower on that one. I mean, it's a classic, it's a classic branding game where you would ask me, and we're going through like bookmaker trends, how surprised would you be at 515 Eastern? If we're looking up at the scoreboard in this one, it's three nothing. So like that's my concern. And I think that's a big part of this slate is identifying which shockier situations can we trust. And that I'm saying that kind of vaguely because it applies primarily to that game, but also like there are some individual players who might be a bit uncertain. So which value brings upside? Because on the week one main slate, you probably don't need to save as much. You want to make sure you're identifying value plays with legitimate upside. And when I say legitimate upside, I mean like 20 points at a running back position, 18 to 20 points at wide receiver tight end. I want to path the 15 or so. So like, yeah, there are guys with very low salaries who are going to help you jam in the true studs, but I want to make sure I have actual darts, like actual guys who can put up a ceiling game in every single slot in my roster. So there are going to be some guys who are under salaried, objectively under salaried, like the Colt's running backs are objectively under salaried. Do I care enough to use them? And I think that's kind of the key question of this slate is, can we build around the games that have the highest, the game with the highest total? And which of the value plays do we think actually has a path to putting up a game that helps vault you towards the top of the leaderboard? Yeah, I mean, and that's different than if you're building, you know, a head-to-head lineup or maybe playing against two other friends in like a group event, like a group tournament. And then sometimes those, you know, obvious, although we'll talk about the Colts like who knows, they're doing the hot hand approach at running back. Those situations are almost always a little, while the players individually might be under salaried, the situations very commonly overrated because like Jim said, you need some upside and looking for just floor, which doesn't really exist in, in like sports to begin with, we'll kind of reference it here and there, but we don't really mean like, oh, one of the Colts right now, we reference it, like the, the ignore the floor tile for the YouTube viewers in Fandle TV plus is back, ignore the floor, like just because you might get a value running back plugged into a start, doesn't mean it's a hundred yards and a touchdown. It's that does not, it's not the case. So we need guys who can get that path to have that path to upside and actually sort of erase some other mistakes because we got a lot of other slots in a lineup. You're going to mess up, mess up more often than not. Every now and then you're going to hit every single player, but that's why, you know, the, you know, when we started this podcast, we were looking at value quarterbacks because they're, you know, they could match the sort of 25 point upside. Now when you have like multiple quarterbacks, you can put up 35, I'm sorry, like a $6,500 salary, like quarterback getting you 18 and Jaylen Hertz goes for 38. You're right. It's hard to make it out those 20 points, man. It's definitely tough. So we're going to break down which of the value plays we actually do trust and talk about that to get you ready here throughout the show for today. Let's start things off by talking about the key week one injuries impacting the site. The first one Cooper cup going to miss this week's game with the Seahawks to do a hamstring strain. So guys like Van Jefferson, Pukin, Akua carry low salaries. And you've also got Tyler Higby in there at tight end for the Rams, but it is a big ding to the Rams passing him as a whole to lose a guy as good as Cooper cup. So which of the Rams past catchers are you on with cup out of the mix? A first thought is Tyler Higby, who is kind of a bane for us because the volume wasn't really a concern. We'll talk more about him later. He's one of my player picks. I'm kind of prefacing all this, but really, really poor catch rate over expectation minus 8.8% in games without cup cup. Last year, just not a lot of yardage upside despite solid volume. I think that can't get worse this year. Yeah, because Stafford's healthy now and like that was not always the case last year. So that does help. Other than that, I mean, I don't mind this game. This is in that conversation for me is like the could be the third game for me. But which of these which of the I'm just calling golfers because I'm still even though we haven't done a golf podcast in a while, which of these players has the ability to get to 15 Fandal points. I think Higby does, which is why I'm not going to push back on it as much as I usually do. Like for me, it's like, okay, he's going to get me eight targets, but he'll get you 33 yards on those targets. I think that's less true when he's facing a non elite defense and has Matthew Stafford being likely the healthiest he'll be the entire year. So I am willing to tolerate Higby at $5,300. I think that Nakua could be fun. I think that like, he might want the burning volume, but like, again, is it enough to really make a difference on a slate? Again, where I'm probably not going to need to save a ton of salary. Now it's $4,000. So like, it is actually going to help quite a bit to have that in your back pocket. It will move the needle, but I think that that's probably one of the value plays where I'm going to be a bit more skeptical and focus primarily on Higby at $5,300. Reports are two that will be the wide receiver three on the team for week one behind Van Jefferson and Tutu Atwell. Evan Silva of Establishment Run has a theory that Tutu Atwell cannot play outside because he blows away because he's too light. So this game is outside. So I'm not sure how much of a factor Tutu Atwell will be. Well, I'm just throwing that out there. I think Evan's right. That's why I'm willing to further his theory over here as well. Speaking of value plays we may not trust. Let's talk about the Colts Backfield. Jonathan Taylor is on the Pup List and will not play in week one. Now this one's I think more complicated for me because it could be a two edit committee with Dion Jackson and Evan Hall. Zach Moss did get in a limited session on Wednesday. If Moss plays, I can write off his back deal without any thought and that's great. But it's a bit more complicated if it's just two guys. We'll talk about them in the bookmaker section. Jeff Wilson is on injured reserve. We'll miss this week's game with the Chargers. We'll talk about our thoughts on Raheem Mostert in the bookmaker section for the Dolphins. Mark Anders got in a limited session on Wednesday with a quad injury. He had missed quite a bit of time in camp, but sounds like he should be okay. John Harbaugh said he looked good in practice. Does this worry you at all on a team that I'm going to be using a lot this week in the Raven because Andrew's salary is $8,000. Lamar is 89. It's a pretty high salary stack. What's your view of Mark Andrews given the injury? Well, we want to talk mistake erasers. Andrews at tight end and Lamar at quarterback can be those relative to the rest of their position. We're talking about salary. We're talking about a true minimum salary receiver that we could potentially plug in. If we get there, we're going to have some value at running back. You need to make sure if you're tempted by value that you again, if you say, well, if I can only play players who have 15 to 18 point, at least potential, then I'm never going to play some of these value guys who are in committees. If you want to play those guys, you need to be doing it with a purpose and stacking Lamar and Mark Andrews is a clear purpose to use that salary. They said not to hit the panic button with Mark Andrews. Kelsey's not on the main slate. I like Mark Andrews, but Kelsey has much higher upside consistently than Andrews does. Andrews has that ability to put the position away. I'm in on Andrews. I'm in on Lamar. I'm in on this team overall, not going to sweat it too much. That being said, high salary tight ends never something I truly, truly build around this week, though, with the value of a receiver running back is a lot easier to justify. It is. I think specifically at running back, I feel really good about the value there. That ties into our next injury, which is not an injury, but Alvin Camara going to miss week one due to a suspension. Kendra Miller also did not practice on Wednesday due to a hamstring injury. If there's no Kendra Miller and no Alvin Camara, it's Jamal Williams. There's another guy on the active roster who is depending where you look. This is a wide receiver in Kirk Merritt, but he might be their backup running back. Tony Jones on their practice squad, you'd probably get elevated, but it's a thin backfield. William's salary is not low and it's $6,800, but how would you view Jamal Williams if Miller cannot go against the Titans? I don't want to throw this one out there too soon because it's not quite the same, but we've been low on Alvin Camara for a while. If it were just him, what salary would you want to play Camara at in this game? This is not the kind of game we're seeking. No, I would say Camara now that he's healthy with an upgraded quarterback in Derek Carr over Eddie Dalton. I would say, yes, Dalton was fine last year. I would say also Michael Thomas is there. It's like the offense in theory should be better. I would say Camara's salary be $78,000. So it's a pretty big deviation from $68,000 and you got to account for Camara being the much more involved pass catcher. My follow-up question, just because this is something we always talk about, is yardage upside? I think so because he would likely be such a high usage guy. I think that he would also get work in the passing you. Now Michael Thomas would take away from that and they got Chris Olave, Joann Johnson seems like he's been getting pretty involved. Payson Hill can steal away touchdowns too. So they're obvious downsides and I don't know if Williams would be my favorite guy in the $6,000 range or running back, but that's partly because I've got other guys that like a lot there. J.K. Dobbins is really fun. Damian Pierce is kind of interesting at $62,000, where he most at $59,000, not in the $6,000 range, but right there. I think Rashad White is also pretty interesting at $64,000. So there are other guys in that range who I do like as well, but I'd be tempted to be high on Jamal just because I think he would play 75% of the snaps minimum for $68,000 for an okay offense. I think that's enough. Yeah. He's in the mix. Okay. Jerry Judy got in a limited session on Wednesday. He is a hamstring injury that he has been dealing with, has a chance to play, but not certain yet. So I've kind of been assuming he won't play. So like I have Cortland Sutton as a player pick. I think that Marvin Minns would also be at least like a consideration as a value play for this week. But how do you, the Broncos, past catchers, and Judy can't go? And are they out of play if Judy does play? J.K. If there's no Judy love Sutton, he's a player pick for me. I'll talk more about that. I can be like more contingent there, but he had some good splits with Judy limited last year. Mims would be in play without Judy. If Judy plays, I'm not going to quite get there. I could see his snaps being a bit limited. I don't think they need to run him sort of into the ground in the debut. He mostly was a high snap guy last year. Not like a 100% snap rate guy, but I think it also depends on how much we like this game, like this offense. And that's kind of a million dollar question this year is where we are with this offense because it burned us a lot last year. I have higher expectations this year, as does pretty much everyone, because it's hard to get much higher than what it was last year and how bad it ended up being. What are your thoughts on this one? J.K. Yeah. I think that if we have Judy in there, it's easier to avoid them because it's three guys and what I'd expect to be a pretty run-centric offense. Givante Williams back and seems like he's pretty healthy, honestly. I think that Williams is in play at a 65, I believe, $6,500. That's at least somewhat interesting, too. But if you got three guys and a run-centric offense, not the world's best offense either, I think that's an easy avoid. But if there's no Judy, that does open up a good amount of volume. So I would say that Sutton would be like a borderline core play at 59. And then Mims would be one of the value plays I actually would think have enough upside to justify at 47 if that were to happen. Judy, honestly, in terms of how I view the rest of the slate, might be one of the bigger injury questions heading into week one. J.K. What about Greg Dulcich at $5,300? G.K. I don't think he's going to play more than half the snap. Sounds like Adam Troutman is actually going to be their primary guy. So I feel like to me, there is enough concern there where I would just avoid, personally. J.K. So basically it's Sutton, for sure, without Judy, Mims is potentially in play without Judy. G.K. Well, Givante, if you can. I would consider Givante. G.K. Oh, that sounds like we're getting to a lot of backs in the $6,000 range who are Mabies and that's never good. G.K. There are a couple that are firm yeses. G.K. Okay, but yeah, there are a lot of Mabies, for sure. Both Christian Watson and Romeo Doves' practice Wednesday with hamstring injuries kind of surprised. I had not heard about these previously myself, so I didn't expect that really. Packers facing the Bears' defense, though, and the Bears' defense pretty leaky. But it's also Jordan Love, an untested starter with likely a bunch of rookies that these guys can't go. So any value for you in this Packers' passing attack, given the uncertainty around Watson and Doves? G.K. I feel like throwing this wrench in here with the injuries is another reason just to stay away. If this team puts up 40 and I'm regretting it, I'll live with it. I don't really see it happening. I don't really want to get out of my skis on an offense. This unproven whenever I already have some great offense is the target. So if I miss out, I miss out. Maybe, I think you're already ahead of me. All right, talk about him. G.K. Yeah, Luke Musgrave, their rookie tight end, basically played every snap with a first-team offense in the preseason. So what he would be would be at every down tight end on a questionable offense, but in a good matchup. And likely in a situation, I always do this thing where I highlight words when I get fidgety, when I realize that my screen is up on the screen. So I probably shouldn't do that. But I think that he'd be very defensible. And honestly, like again, I think that alongside Mims, one of the more defensible lower-sourced plays this week, just because the snap should be there, the matchup is there, the target share should be there given all the injuries. So I would say Musgrave would be one of the more palatable value plays this week. And honestly, a guy I'd feel pretty good about if I'm not, you know, if Higbee winds up tracking to be super, super popular, I think that Musgrave could be a good pivot at 45. Yeah, I think he will be. And just to sort of wrap up like tight end, I mean, we have Andrews who has like multi-touchdown upside. T.G. Hawkinson, I think, might go a little bit over look. George Kittle's due for some touchdown regression. It's not a very good game environment. Dallas Goddard, similar. A lot of malice defeated in that offense, not necessarily the best overall matchup. Kyle Pitt seems like everyone's down on pits again. He's kind of over salaried based on that sentiment. So then you get into like the guys who could maybe get you 15, but if they don't, or if only a handful of guys like even get to 10, then you're fine with tight end. So every week, tight end is betting four or against the studs to hit their high end of the range of outcomes. Yeah, Jaden Reed is also 5,000. I think I'd prefer Mims. Mims without Judy over Reed. If one of those guys is out, if they're both out, then they'd probably favor Reed just because I don't know. Maybe I shouldn't. Maybe that's going too far. There would be no Cortland Sutton in this offense, takeaway targets. Maybe that's my defense, but I think he'd be in play too, but for Musgrave at $4,500. Terry McClourin got in a limited practice on Wednesday with his toe injury, hurt that in the preseason, which likely puts him on track to play. And the commanders are at a very good spot here, taking on a team that is pretty actively tanking the Cardinals. So what are your thoughts on the commander's offense here, assuming McClourin does play? Another one of the situations where we don't have a whole lot of certainty about how this offense will operate from an efficiency standpoint. I know we got the Sam Hall start. We both like him. He can run. Is that a Cinnamon Toast Crunch mug? It's the Chicago train system. It looked like I've gone full Chicago. I've got the Chicago street course hat on. I've got the Cubs hat over here. I was wearing my Scott Fishbowl Chicago shirt. I know it's bad. I acknowledge that I have a problem. It's okay. I moved in case you can't tell between the last NFL podcast. It's become your whole identity. Apparently. I don't know. This is one of those situations where the comp I'm getting is a classic Patriots game where their total is solid. They should play from ahead, but I don't think anybody's going to have dominant market shares. I like Terry McLourin. I like Johan Dotson, but they got two running backs. I think I might take a wait-and-see approach here. Again, I don't know if this offense is going to be the one that torches me. If it does, I'll probably look back and say I should have been higher, but I didn't know how to do it with confidence. I'm pretty much on board with you, especially at the running back position. I think that Dotson at 61 is enticing. I just don't ever find myself gravitating towards receivers in games with totals this low. That's a big part of why I'm not super inclined to go here. The odds that they get me 15, probably pretty high because that's a touchdown in 80 yard, that's very doable for them. The odds they get me 25, I don't need that at that salary, but I want the potential for it, I guess. Sounds like maybe you're higher on Dotson with Washington as it is now than you are on Cortland Sutton if Jerry Judy plays. If Judy plays, probably yes. Yeah, it'd be close though because I'm still not totally out in Sutton if Judy goes, but I think that's a good question to ask. I think they're comparable to me, at least. Panthers wide receiver DJ Chark did not practice Wednesday with a hamstring injury. Shout out to a legend, DJ Chark, been so good to us. Adam Theon, Teres Marshall were both limited as well. Panthers are indoors and they're taking on a Falcons defense that struggled last year, but is improved, I would say. Apply total for the Panthers under 16, not ideal. Any Panthers interest for you and Bryce Young's debut? Yeah, I don't think it's, it's not going to be Chark week and I don't think it's going to be Panther week either. I'm out. I wasn't using Adam Theon when his quarterback was being paid $35 million. I'm not going to use Adam Theon when he's a year older and his quarterback is playing in his first game. So no, thanks. Hard pass there. And I don't really want to go at the Miles Sanders either in the running back room there. John Mechie has a hamstring injury and didn't practice on Wednesday. I don't think the Titans or the Texans are totally out of play for bringbacks in your Baltimore stacks. So like, I'm okay with going at some of these guys here. So if Mechie can't go, how would the impact review of Nico Collins as a potential bringback for Lamar lineups for this weekend? Yeah, he's probably the only one I have interest in up here. What's that? Not Pierce. I don't, I don't really like Damian Pierce as much as I think everyone else seems to. I was with you last year because he was inefficient and it was pretty rough. But yes, I think I like CJ Stroud quite a bit. So much better quarterback this year. No Titus Howard along the offensive lines. That does hurt. But I think the offensive line is at least not a weakness for this team. So I don't mind Pierce as a bringback option at 62 because he did play a lot more third down in the preseason, which implies maybe he's going to get that work. Devon single digits is there. So like, you know, there is more competition for work there than there was before. But I think that he's at least viable. Do I like him more than Ricky Mostert? No. But will I use him in Lamar bringbacks? Yeah, I think so. Why not? All right. Yeah, maybe some, but I prefer Collins at 58. I feel like I need I feel like I need to add more receivers to the player pool and start to whittle down the running backs and get really nitpicky. Yeah. So, but yeah, Collins, a lot of area yards last year, not, you know, pretty, pretty below average catch rate of expectation, but because this quarterback was awful, probably can't get worse. So yeah, 58 for him. So how does Collins stack up? Let's say Judy plays, because we know that Sutton's probably number one in like the value receiver conversation. If Judy's out, Dotson, Sutton with Judy or Miko Collins. If we assume the chlorine and Judy play, I would probably go Collins one. In part because I'll be very high in the Ravens. So yeah, that's part of it. Okay, let's go into our bookmaker section. We talked about three games with intriguing bookmaker totals over at Vandal Sportsbook, whether it be the total spread, whatever it may be games we put could potentially want to stack this weekend. We say game stack, we're talking about having players from both sides of a single game within the same lineup. So what's our things off here with the chargers at the Dolphins highest total on the main slate that is a 50 and a half right now at Vandal Sportsbook chargers are three point favorites. The spread has been inching towards the chargers, but the total has held pretty steady 50 and a half. My model things see under is the way to go. It was actually the best bet on a total for this week based on my model. What could go wrong? But we got big play threats on both sides here. You got a new play caller in Los Angeles, which is a great thing for them. So when you look at this slate, Brandon, do you think that dolphins at chargers is the premier game on the slate? Yeah, I think Bengals, Browns is within shouting distance, but you know, those two are in their own probably each their own tier and then tier three starts after these two games. We're not going to be alone in that just based on how the totals break out based on the sportsbook odds. But you know, main concern here is always Miami's pace. The only team slower than Miami was were the Packers last year in terms of situation adjusted pace, which is like my own metric for counting for like pre snap win probability and just a whole lot of different factors. But they don't run a whole lot of plays on their, you know, their own. And I think that they like it that way. The chargers though should play even faster this year with the new OC. Talk about that more in our transaction. But I think where I'm really getting to is this is the number one game for me. I love Justin Herbert. We got Moschert. I don't know who else I'm going out of my way to prioritize and that feels backwards to me if I like this game so much. So let's start with Moschert talking about him in this game. I think that the only difference I have with you at the way I view this game is you said this is tier one, Bengals, Browns, tier two, everything else is tier three. I think these two are in the same tier. So and like, you know, putting me back against the wall, I might go Bengals, Browns a hair higher. I don't know. I just I think people were getting a little ahead of themselves on the Browns offense though to potentially, although that's part of the reason I like is I think people are out on them. But maybe that's just me. Oh, no, I feel like no, it seems people love them really high on them. Do people love them? It seems like but no. So I think this game is still tier one. I just might be lower on it than Consensus, which sounds weird to say. But let's talk about Moschert because I think he's kind of like the one guy who I do really like in this game. Moschert, Soury, $5,900. No Jeff Wilson here, obviously. And then also Devon A-Chain is healthy and able to go, but missed a lot of time in practice with a shoulder injury he sustained during the preseason. So it's a rookie, missed a lot of time, coming in. Moschert I think is probably going to have a pretty good role here for 59. So I would say among the value backs where he most is my favorite. Do you agree with that? Yeah, I think so too. I think that that's kind of the way has to go. I had good workloads last year in a couple of games with no Jeff Wilson. I don't think they want to like run him into the ground given his injury history. But you know, I think that this could be a good spot for him. Talking about the wide receivers, we had Tyree Kill 88, Jalen Waddle 79 on the charger side, Keenan now at 8000, Mike Williams 71. And then Josh Palmer seems like kind of earned the wide receiver three job for the chargers. All those salaries are high. I think Keenan is pretty rough from a salary perspective. Big Mike a moral K-weight than 71. You know, Waddle and Hill deserve those high salaries, but like it's not like you're getting a discount on anybody in this game. So that's my big concern is like I'm not getting a lot of value here. Yeah. And you're not just going to walk into a game with the best total and find a bunch of value. That's how this whole thing works. It was stupid. They know what they're doing. But yeah, that's where I keep coming back to is it's easy to mark this game number one, but when you're actually constructing your lineups and building your player pool, it's a little trickier. The name I keep coming back to though and Jim and I have kind of struggled with this one for a long time, Austin Eckler. Yeah, you know, hands up his look. He overperforms. He's over. He's been overperforming in the touchdown department for two straight years now by a substantial margin that all the data says he should regress there. But he's like the Des Bryant of running backs basically, but the workload isn't as bad as I think our sourness suggests it is. He's got he's got more yardage upside than, you know, it's tough. Like his rushing yard out yardage output sometimes looks pretty bleak, but we know how much of a threat he is in the red zone. And I don't know if that's going to change. If anything, this team should probably be a little more efficient and just play, you know, have more plays. So yeah, if you're building one lineup, is Eckler in it? Is he consideration? Not a consideration for one lineup? No. I like too many mid range running backs. And I'd rather, like if I'm building one lineup, I'd probably want Jamar chasing there. And it's harder for me to get Chase and Eckler, or I want Mark Anders and Lamar, you know, that it's pretty big time because we historically, yeah, yeah, where I'm probably ignoring the high end running backs for the most part. So like Eckler, it's so touchdown dependent because like he had a game last year where he had 199 yards and scrimmage, an absurd game, like unheard of levels of awesomeness. But even with that game in the mix, he salvaged 93 yards from scrimmage per game across the entire season. And like for this salary, that's not enough. Like he could score two touchdowns and still like be fine as a play for 92. So like, I don't think in situations where you need to full fade him, but like, I'm okay being a decent amount lower than consensus on him, despite the fact that this game is fine. I'd rather use Mike Williams than Eckler at their respective salaries, I think is the way I'd phrase it. Okay. I mean, I'm just trying to come around on Eckler. That's still like a top seven rate, the scrimmage yards with a, we know a great red zone role. I think he deserves to be there in this game environment. Sure. If you're stacking this game, obviously he's there because he's such a touchdown threat, but thoughts in the quarterbacks, Justin Herbert and Tua Tunga-Vailoa? Love Herbert. He's one of my player picks, struggling a bit with Tua. I never view him as a super high upside guy. The play volume plays part in that too. Efficiency is what matters at quarterback in a single game, not passing volume, but it could be there. I just think for that salary, there's better plays in that tier. I mean, isn't Borough 79? I'd rather go Borough by a significant margin personally. And like Herbert, I think Herbert's probably the better option between the two personally. But it's like a one and a half QB game. If I just settle on this game as like, let's say I'm building five or 10 lineups and I just want to stack this game different ways. If I played like six or seven Herbert lineups and three or four Tua, I can live with that in case it just puts up, you know, 90 points and it's just, but other than that, I think I'm kind of looking at other quarterbacks. I would say for like single entry, where our goal, like our thesis of that format is to be different without being dumb. Like you don't need to be totally off the walls in those formats. I probably would just, like if I have one single entry lineup, I might both fade this game. But like, you know, you can play more than one single entry lineup across different contests. So I'd get there. But like, if I have one lineup, one dart, I'm probably looking instead towards the Bengals at the Browns. Right now, second highest total on the board, 48 and a half. Now the total Bengals favor by two and a half on the road here. And Brandon, I feel like this one is easier to stack because both teams have high usage players in, in, in play here. How does this one great out for you for game stacking? Like it a lot. Probably somewhat similar where I'd say it's like a one and a half QB game. Yes. 1.75. I'm more likely used to Sean Watson than Tua. That's why I was just about to say the same exact sentence. Love, Jamar Chase. I think John Nixon's really interesting. His, he started off the season with great workloads. And then as he got injured, so my JP Ryan stepped up that dwindled. But I don't think there's any reason really to suggest that he won't start off like he did last season. So I think he's very intriguing at a salary of 7,500, which is very reasonable. Love Joe Burrow. It's possible people are a little bit low on him because the calf injury don't think that's necessary. Having a harder time with the Brown side of things. I see the case for a lot of different names. We don't typically love Nick Chubb because he doesn't catch a lot of passes. Historically, the salary of 86 is up there. You're grinning Nick Chubb or Austin Eckler. That's grimacing. I'm not grinning. I'm grimacing because I am spending down or running back this week outside of one certain guy. I am. There are other things that I'm doing that are weird this week, but I'm also on Nick Chubb this week, which is like, it's a total each like, you know, people have those tweets of like, if you were kidnapped, what would be a dead giveaway that this is not you? Me spending down and running back and liking Nick Chubb a lot, probably going to be a couple of things that are red flags. But the reason I like Nick Chubb a lot is because A, I want to stack this game. B, his salary is 86, which is not that bad. And C, the yards from Scrimmage Upside this guy gets you is bananas. There's no cream hunts in play anymore. I'm not expecting Nick Chubb to suddenly get a ton of passing game work, but there that's within the range of outcomes. And cream hunt would always be a guy who came in towards the goal on and took away stuff there. So like, do they trust anybody else in this running back room more than Nick Chubb right now? Probably not. So I feel like of the high salary backs of the guys with the salary of 8,000, they're higher. Nick Chubb after considering a salary game environment, et cetera, is my number one boy for this week. Thoughts for you on Nick Chubb. I like him. I see the case for it. I think it's just, I think Eckler is the better play between those two. Yeah, I mean, I get it because his workload is insane. What are your true expectations for Nick Chubb as a receiver now? Probably similar to what it was before, but there's a potential for it to be better. Okay, but you're not banking on it. I've seen people kind of like assume who will have a lot more targets. I'm not assuming that. I think it's possible. Like quote unquote, a lot more targets, I would say four. If anyone new, anyone just needs to refresh her targets, receiving stuff, it's very important. We're twice as much as they carry for our running back on. Yeah, on average, a target leads to twice as many expected Fando points as a carry. We cite adjusted opportunities, which is carries plus double your targets. Based on that, Nick Chubb tends to rank pretty poorly because he almost exclusively is a rusher. That's one of the reasons that we have been low on him historically. Similar for Derek Henry, similar rushers. I'm not considering Henry this week. I am considering Chubb, but I think the better play is Austin Eckler straight up. I know there's a salary gap, but if we're getting there, we're spending down other places. I think we can kind of not nitpick to that degree. I would also say it does depend on projected roster rate. If Eckler is, if Nick Chubb winds up being more popular than Eckler, then fine. Like I understand, maybe I want to go to Eckler then, but I don't think that'll be the case. Talk about Mixon because I think they were both in the same page and Mixon is pretty enticing at 75. Yeah. So like I said, he's one of my player picks. I'll basically just, I guess, stop burying the lead and I'll just start to say some of this stuff up front. But last year, through his first nine games, he was at least, he played at least two-thirds of the team's offensive snaps and all of those, he was at a 73% snap rate overall in those first nine games. Then we know he got hurt. Some odd JP Ryan had played really, really well and it was sort of like a 60-40 split and then Mixon kind of got phased out. The competition's not there for Mixon this year. The salary is down to a very reasonable number in one of the best games. I think he's a great play and I would be astonished if he's like still limited to like a 60% snap rate all of a sudden and that's just who he is. He's probably going to be more in the 75% range. I agree. I think he's a good play. My question for you is Joe Mixon is 75 or Alexander Madison is 73. Well, poor Cano's dose, but Mixon. Okay. I'd go Madison, but I think they're in the same tier and both, like you said, why not bowl? That's very fair as well. It's all about the wide receivers in this game. You mentioned Jamar Chase already. I wholeheartedly agree with you that Chase is like one of my favorite studs at any position on this slate. T Higgins 74, why not? I think that that makes a lot of sense too. But also on the opposing side, Amara Cooper, Souris 67, Donovan People's Jones 59. Now they did add Elijah Moore in the Mixon saw season. I'm I think lower on more than most people. So that maybe that taints things here, but I do think that Cooper is a really good play at 67. I think People's Jones is viable for game stacks. And I think that David and Joku is a game stacking option as well at 56. Now for like a non game stack, Higby's a better play at 53. But I think that in Joku's in play, four game stacks. So thoughts on the past catchers beyond Chase for you. It's tougher. It's a lot of game stack only type plays sort of as you alluded to. You didn't quite go so far as to say that, but I don't know if any of these are one off plays. And if I'm not, if I don't have like Burrow or Deshaun Watson lineup, I don't know if I'm really playing a whole lot of these past catchers other than Jamar Chase, who frankly is set up for a lot of success this whole season. But I think it starts in week one. So maybe I'm too low, but it's tea also game stacks only for you. Yeah, everyone but Chase. What about so like a Mari as well? Because I think I might be higher on a Mari than you. Yeah, everyone who's not named Jamar Chase and is a past catcher in this game. Well, I got just, you know, making sure. No, I know, but I just think that it's I can kind of make better one off plays than these guys. Okay. That's fair. I can see that I'm higher on Cooper specifically than you and Chubb. So again, that just kind of ties to me being higher in the Browns offense, but that's fine. I can. That's not the worst thing in the world doesn't make me see. Well, like so last year, like part of the reason why I'm okay with it is like Watson when he came back, they played in like 16 games with terrible weather in a row. And like, you know, I don't want to overreact to a small sample, I guess I'd rather. So I'm already had a 25% target share, not a lot of play volume as you mentioned, weather played a part of that. Yeah. Cooper's not games that's only. Okay. But I kind of prefer Tyler Lockett. That's fair. As a standalone play, I might go lock it too. But yeah, it's I think they're in the same tier. Let's finish up here by talking about the Jags at the Colts Jags four and a half point favorites on the road against the Colts. That game has a retractable roof as every stadium should toss that in there. There's a rushing quarterback on the other side of this game. Total is 45 and a half. My model says that's actually pretty accurate at least based on my stuff. So that's encouraging. Calvin Ridley now in town for the Jaguars, Jaguars, and there's no Jonathan Taylor on the Colts. So how do you view Jags at Colts for game stacking? Really like it. Could be a two QB game. Doing his two QBs. Yes. Which of the quarterback made you? Lawrence because he's right by burrow. Yeah. And like that was my hesitation. So I don't want my player pool that quarterback to be too big. Yeah. So like, but I would say like the fact that Lawrence is the bigger hesitation for me feels offensive because he's like an amazing quarterback. But like, I think it is a two quarterback game. Yeah. I do as well. Are there any running backs here? Because I think probably not. Personally, not really. Because I think the worry about this is going to age me. So I'm sorry. But like the worry for me with Travis Etn is he could be a mirror of Dula back in the day with the Lions where he would get the between the 20s work, but wouldn't get a ton of passing game work. He doesn't really earn targets in this offense and may get pilfered at the goal line by Tank Bixby. And like that's not a bad role for like a running back, but it's a bad role for running back here on upside DFS. And like that's a key distinction for me. So like I, what's the salary? 77. Yeah. And he's a spreadsheet runner. So yeah. So like that's that's a factor with him. Yeah. I and like, let's talk about the colds quickly here. My thought process is Dion Jackson is probably going to get most the early down work, but Evan Hall mix in there and Hall very good pass catcher and very good pass blocker. And so like, I know what, what do you mean? Is he rude? Come on. Watch the tape, bro. Evan Hall, I think he's going to mix in enough. Like I think that the rushing work will be efficient for the guys on this team because they've got a rushing quarterback, but I just don't know if either of these guys have a path to 20 fangirl points. And like where he most is 59. So he's like right there. So it ought to just go there. Yeah. I'm not getting there. Yeah. Okay. Let's talk about the, talk about Anthony Richardson then because the salary is $6,700 and he was the firm guy and it being a two quarterback gain. So talk to me about Anthony Richardson here at $6,700. Just largely projected for a lot of rushing volume almost every single week. Jim and I will not really dip into the 6,000 range, let alone even the low 7,000 range because whenever you have multiple quarterbacks who can put up sort of bankable high ceiling games, it's really, really difficult to make up for that, especially in the most predictable position that there is when it comes to building out a fandal lineup. Richardson though has upside due to the rushing. There are running back concerns. So maybe this team's like, fine, we don't need this big money running back. Our quarterback can score us some touchdowns too. It might be a little bit of that. I like this game overall. And for the salary, all of the downsides are baked in. So you're not necessarily like, look, we played Justin Fields. Everyone played Justin Fields last year. His sort of ceiling with passing was effectively like 150 yards sometimes. Like that's basically what he was doing. Anthony Richardson for this salary in this game. Can't have a solid game. I don't think that he is in consideration for me in a single entry, I don't see single entry, but my main lineup because I think there's a lot that could go wrong still. But he is one of the best quarterback plays of the week. I think that my expectation for him heading in is similar to Lamar Jackson's rookie year. So if you remember his rookie year, he took over for Joe Flacco and Lamar did not flash a ceiling in those games, but his floor was insane because of the rushing. That's my baseline expectation. But there is the potential for more for him to unlock that ceiling if the passing is better than I expected to be. Because I think there'll be struggles there given personnel on this team, honestly, given the issues he had as a passer at Florida, stuff like that. So like my baseline expectation is that the passing is a struggle and he still has a high median expectation due to the rushing. But there is the potential for a larger ceiling, which is why I'm okay going there. He's also playing indoors on a pretty fast track in Indy. So I think that's, that's enticing too, which is why I'm okay going there. Now the question is if you use Richardson, will you stack him with anybody? No, I agreed. It's naked Richardson lineups, but I'm fine considering a stack with an opposing QB for a receiver. And I think Calvin really deserves a lot of attention this week at a 7000 salary. Not a whole lot of data to go off of obviously, but seems like 7000. Yeah, what more do you need? Yeah, like Ridley 7000. That's an amazing salary. Kirk at 69 is like not a bad salary either. Not getting to say Jones, like he was, he had okay games last year, but that was without Calvin Ridley. I think Evan Ingram is okay at 58. So I can get by with that. Now the Colts tight end room is a disaster. There's no, my guy Jelani Woods is on IR, truly heartbreaking scenario. So I can't get there obviously. And like I'm not going to trust any of the other guys there. As far as the Colts past catchers go, like Michael Pittman probably going to have the highest target share, but a lot of buzz around Josh Downs in the preseason, earning a work in the slot at 49. And then Alec Pierce, I think is a very talented player at 52. And if there are three guys who could potentially earn targets and a run centric offense with a rookie quarterback who wasn't very efficient as a passer in college, there are none. So I agree to you where if I use Richardson, it's going to be naked. Yeah, I just don't see the case for it. So I like this game. Yeah. But there's a, this game could score, you know, 50 points, 55 points without a lot of like relevant fantasy games because it can be spread out. So that's also another thing to keep in mind when you're looking at the totals, depends a lot on the market shares for these players. I agree. All right, let's move into our trends discussion here for week number one. What we do here is go through trends that we've picked up on. Now this could be usage trends for a specific team. It could be league wide trends regarding scoring. It could be perfect lineup analysis, roster rate analysis. It's very, very broad. So your first trend for week one is talking about what we've seen from a bookmaking perspective in week one, because bookmaking totals spreads, but it's a large part in daily fantasy. So what did you notice when you look at week one from a bookmaking perspective? Yeah, so I just wanted to kind of compare week one in terms of like predictiveness compared to others throughout the seasons. I think I've done this in the past, but look, it's week one. There's a lot of unknowns. There are a few teams that I basically said, I'll take away and see approach. And if it burns me in week one, I'll be surprised, but can't kick myself too much because you can't play everyone from a daily fantasy standpoint. But a couple is just sort of key takeaways here that I came across. Typically we see tighter spreads in week one than we see in the average week makes sense. Again, a lot of uncertainty, but also the absolute difference in point differential and spread is one of the largest we get all season, which basically means a little less accurate spreads or potential for more blowouts that are just way off the spread that can kind of skew things. So it's a little bit more open in that sense. Additionally, underdogs are more likely to win and wins are somewhat tied to fantasy success. It's not just about winning. He can win 17, 14 and really want a whole lot of that for your daily fantasy lineups. But again, just sort of speaking broadly to what we can learn underdogs more likely to win, home teams are a lot less likely to win, which is just kind of noteworthy I think in general. And specifically with home teams favored by one to three points since 2018, pretty low win rate, about 41% compared to 53% the rest of the season. So probably a lot of those games where it's like, okay, don't have a lot of information, home team slight favorites, then you learn which teams are maybe a little more, a little better or a little worse than that sort of baseline expectation. Some teams that generally fit that this week, Saints Bears Chargers, again, this is about winning. Winning is somewhat tied, the Chargers could go out and lose, you know, 42, 41, the Saints can go out and win 10 to 7. Like, you know, it's just basically what I need to reiterate here is that chaos is a little more likely or substantially more likely in week one. It's a great week to sort of take more stands and kind of say, look, I think the Packers, for example, are going to be really good. And therefore, I want to get out ahead of things. I mean, you take your pick, say that, you know, the Chargers are going to struggle for whatever, like whatever it is, it's a little more justified in week one, than in other weeks. Week ones tend to have an average over under 46.1 points, which is, you know, average. It's been trending up. But these opening games actually tend to score a bit more than the full sample average. So we have some low totals, they could score a bit more points. But that's with week one, I looked last year at a double check week one was pretty rough with the scoring. But typically, we do see points. So don't just look at a total that's like 45 points and say, Hey, you know, this is a game I can't I can't target anything like that. So all of this is to say, like, I'm not going to nitpick Chargers, Dolphins, or Bengals, Browns, but what are you seeing? If any, like, which games do you think might have some surprising outcomes? Because these totals and spreads, again, historically speaking, a little less predictive, not substantially so, but a little less. Anything jump out to you? Well, I'm going to pick Chargers, Dolphins personally, because I think that's the one that does have some ability to be less fantasy friendly than you might think, based on the totals. Like if I look at my total model for this week, that actually, it gives that game the third highest total on the main slate. I have Browns, Bengals, number one total for that 46.6 for me. So still below the market, but whatever. Baltimore Houston is actually above the large part because the Ravens, but also I think CJ Stroud's fine. That one is at 45.9 Chargers, Dolphins is at 45.8 ranks third among games on the slate. So I think if we're looking for a spot where there could be a pretty decent whiff, I would say that'd be the first place I'd turn to. And as a result, again, if you give me one single lineup, I'm probably going to be okay riding without that one, within that one lineup. I would also say, I think the Browns are a bit feisty and the bookmakers are saying that's not an anti-Bengals thing. That is a potential for the Browns to make strides in year number two where they don't have to deal with the massive wind for DeSean Watson. So I think that those two things coming together as why I'm okay being a little bit lower on the Chargers, Dolphins being a bit higher on Browns Bengals. It makes a lot of sense. I think the real, like I said, I'm not going to nitpick Chargers, Dolphins, but a lot of daily fantasy comes down to fear of missing out on these big games. The takeaway here for me is if you're looking at Chargers, Dolphins saying for this reason or that reason, I think people are too high on this game. By like week seven, if everyone's on a game, you're probably missing something. In week one, I think it's a little more okay to say that other people are missing something. So it's a great week to sort of be different. But as always, we say be different without being dumb. It doesn't say like, and look, I mean, maybe you think like Falcons Panthers is the game of the week from a scoring standpoint. I think that's a little out there. Go for it. Go crazy. Yeah. Yeah. I think that you have a lot more leeway to think that someone else is wrong in week one. You do have weeks. And that actually ties into my first trend, too, which looks at week one, perfect, Fandall lineup. So looking at the best lineup you could have built from a Fandall perspective, looking backwards. So this is always going to be, it's going to give more value to value plays than you'll see in like reality because it's backward looking. So you get to cherry pick the best values every week. So it's flawed, but it's a different beast. So I did want to look at week one, perfect lineups and see where we want to take advantage of the fact that salaries are more inefficient in week one than they'll likely be any other week the entire year. So dug back through perfect lineups, see how things change from that perspective in the opener. So looking at data from 2018 to 2022. So a five year sample in week one, perfect lineups. Now quarterback totals were high across the board. Average total for quarterbacks in those perfect lineups was 49.6, whereas the average total for all quarterbacks in perfect lineups is 48.3. And part of that is because totals do go down later in the year, the wind goes up, it gets cold, there are fewer good quarterbacks in play because of injuries and stuff like that. But four out of those five quarterbacks came from gains the total of 49 and a half or higher. Now obviously we're just one game with a total that high this week, which is Chargers Dolphins. But like that does increase my interest in Brown's Bengals, especially as a total arises there three to five quarterbacks in perfect lineups also entered the game as underdogs. So that kind of kind of goes speak to what you were saying where we may not have a great read on the market entering this week. So underdogs may be more viable. That's generally true a quarterback for people tend to under roster quarterbacks who are slight underdogs not big underdogs for not chasing passing volume, but slight underdogs always pretty enticing a quarterback. And then three out of five quarterbacks had salaries of $8,400 or higher. Give me Lamar. We were generally able to find good salary savings at running back. The average salary of a perfect lineup running back in week one is $576 lower than it is for perfect running backs for across the entire year. Of the 12 perfect running backs in this time, five of them had salaries under $6,000. Only three had salaries above $8,000. So if you find under-salary backs with good projected workloads, you can generally feel pretty free to take it. Wide receiver and tight ends where, where are those salary savings went? Quarterback obviously as well. But perfect tight ends in the sample were Travis Kelsey, Travis Kelsey, Dallas Goddard before a salary got high. So he was lower. Evan Ingram at 64 and then Rob Grunkowski, big fandal guy at 79. So three studs in there and a mid-range play with Ingram and a value play in Dallas Goddard. A wide receiver, five out of 18 players had salaries of $8,000 or higher. Half of them had salaries of $6,500 or higher. So last year's perfect lineup actually had two receivers with a salary of at least $8,000. So I typically like to spend up at running back, but I'm okay pausing that a bit for this week, trying to hunt for guys with under-salary workloads there and building around stud pass catchers, whether it be Jamar Chase, Mark Anders, whatever it may be allocating some of that salary over there instead. So not a huge tweak for this week, but the big takeaways for me are bookmakers, good at identifying quality game environments for quarterbacks, even in week one. Not perfect, but good. We shouldn't be too scared of underdogs because like you said, there's more margin for error. We should accept running backs with lower salaries and the potential for good workloads. And we should try to get pass catchers who project really nice volume. So that's what the takeaways were from me. Anything to stand out for you, Brandon, with regards to this specific week one slate? I think the running back thing is most intriguing here because we joke about, we'll have joke about the, you know, our tendency to allocate a lot of salary for running back. That's because this is different than like if you draft a season long team, like you need one of the Colts running backs for this week. Sure. Go crazy. Sure. Right. This is you can build any combination you want within the restraints of the salary cap and taking guys who are clearly in committees, it's different. So the distinction I just want to make is we love value backs when they're actually clearly the guy or like the clear 1A with like a 75% workload, maybe not 100% because we don't really get those anymore. That's the distinction. We have those names this week or at least a handful of them. That's the difference and that basically tends to filter out from there because we always want to play Justin Jefferson and Jamar Chase and Travis Kelsey. They're just not, you can't build around those guys whenever there's no value at running back because it just doesn't quite work. That's how we approach it. That I think was the main takeaway here and that kind of falls in line with how we're viewing the slate overall where we have interest in Nick Chubb or Austin Eckler, but this week more than most the salary, the value is clear at running back. So I think that all checks out. I agree. Okay. Let's move to your second trend. Talking about teams that could change their pace for this year because we want play volume and play volume comes from pace. So when you dug into that, which team set out as being potentially ones to buy low on or potentially sell high on due to pace changes this year? Yeah. So I track pace every week. I adjusted for game context. So every play counts, every pass and run play counts, it adjusts for things like pre-snap win probability and just other factors in general because plays per game can be helpful. Plays per game can really be skewed, especially early on in the season with some overtime games. I think Cincinnati played in an overtime game early last year and like it went, I don't know. It's like a Vikings game? I don't know. But comes to mind is like their plays per game number or 18. I can't remember. There were two teams that just had like elevated plays per game numbers and it's really hard to find that stuff, but I'll be posting this every week on Fandle.com slash research if you're interested. But like you said, pace matters. It's really easy to, it's like one of those things where it's easy to overvalue because there's only a set number of plays really that a game can feature because you can't just run a play every second if a team wants to like it doesn't work that way. But there's also actually a floor of plays because there's a play clock. So there is a range, but we want to look for those outliers. We want to look for teams playing, you know, opponents that are faster. We also, I think this is probably the most underutilized part of this is like avoiding teams or downgrading teams, playing teams that actively want to just bleed the clock out. I think there are some teams though that this year might play a little bit differently than they did last year. My week one post is up on Fandle.com slash research, but some teams that jump out and these might not be the most appealing offenses necessarily, but their impact on a game can be very important. Tampa Bay led in adjusted pace last year. Obviously they're swapping from Tom Brady to Baker Mayfield. I know everyone but Jim thinks that's a downgrade, but this team really only has one one way to go and it's down in terms of pace. How slow they get remains to be seen. I think it could be markedly slower and that's going to impact our interest in Mike Evans and Chris Godwin and Rashad White. These are their talented players, but if they're slowing things down and being less efficient, that's a big problem. But this also, you know, Buccaneers games were kind of something that we'd like to target last year. Even if their market shares were a little frustrating, it had a positive overall impact on the opponents that they played. The Chargers though kind of the opposite already fast might get faster with Kellen Moore as their offensive coordinator. Dallas was extremely fast with more in that position. Top two finishes and adjusted pace the past two years and the Chargers just sort of go into the moon. I think that starts on week one. Justin Herbert, probably my favorite overall quarterback play for the week. Based on salary, game environment, just all of that put together. And he's due for a lot of positive touchdown regression. So I think that starts in week one, even though Jim clearly hates that game. And everyone in it, obviously. The Cardinals, I think this is similar to like the Buccaneers where they're going to take a step back and pace, be less fun. Their offense is going to be frustrating, we know, but teams playing them are going to suffer most likely. It's one that I think we just need to keep an eye on. Back to the fun sense of things. Baltimore, new offensive coordinator coming over from the Georgia Bulldogs, Todd Munkin. Last year, Baltimore's 29th and adjusted pace and 24th and pass rate over expectation last season. During their games with Lamar Jackson, there were 12th and pass rate over expectation. So a lot more pass heavy, but still just 31st in pace. If we see a pace up performance from Baltimore this year, they're going to be a team that we just have sort of as no-brainers every single week. So that's something to keep an eye out for. And then this doesn't impact the Jets because they're on the main slate, but Aaron Rodgers had the Packers running at the slowest pace of any offense that frankly we've seen in a long time. I joked about, I watch a lot of stuff on DVR, two 15-second taps of the button to get you to the next play because they're never going to snap it before that. I'm very interested to see how the Jets operate this year, but Green Bay should be, they can't really get a whole lot slower. They should be, they should have more plays. I think that's kind of overall positive. But again, it was one of those like teams playing the Packers last year, we downgraded. We weren't going to have to do that this year. I think that's appealing. We have some, we haven't really talked about Justin Fields, it could be a big positive impact for him in week one, but as it stands, I think games without huge pace questions that should be fast this week, assuming no unexpected changes here. Jacksonville and Indy, we talked about that game, we like it. Unless Indy slows things down with Anthony Richardson, this is the fastest main slate game, while also assuming that Tampa Bay slows things down, which I'd be astonished if they leave the league in pace this year. And then Ram Seahawks, another notch above the rest, largely because Seattle was fast, but I think that game is pretty appealing. We talked about the tiers of games. I think we're both in on Indy and Jacksonville pretty heavily, at least from certain standpoints, but anything jump out to you this week and largely, like what about the Seahawks? Ravens, Ravens. I mean, like, it's just confirmation bias. Like, well, though, that's part of why I want to be there is because, you know, they have a new offensive scheme. It sounds like Monkin wants to run at a pretty high pace. They've got better pass catchers now. Like I'm not super high on Odell, but like when it goes from DeMarcus Robinson, the Corpse of Deshaun Jackson and whatever it was, they had a wide receiver last year to hopefully a healthy Mark Andrews, healthier Sean Bateman, Zay flowers, Odell, that's a lot better. So like to me, that makes Lamar the best quarterback on the slate after considering salaries above Anthony Richardson. Like if you give me one lineup, it's probably Lamar is in the pole position to be the quarterback I use in that one lineup. So love Lamar and love that game as a result. I think that's the big one for me. As far as the Seahawks go, I think that Lockett and Metcalf are both really good standalone plays. Lockett more so than Metcalf because the salary is lower at $6,800. But like I'm not opposed to Metcalf, not really looking for bringbacks. And usually if I'm playing a receiver, I want to have interest in a player on the opposing side. And like you could talk to some of the camp makers for sure. Tyler Higby at tight end is fine. So like that's okay. But I'm okay with the Seahawks, specifically their receivers. I don't really want to go at the running backs given that Zach Charbonnet is there now. And it's like probably going to be a pretty divided backfield. Yeah, I'll take a wait and see on the backfield, but I want to get out there for Tyler Lockett. And I think again, if you're burning a lot of lineups, you want to get some access to some value. The Rams, not the worst way to do it, but like Lockett Higby mini stacks, pretty appealing to me. I think so too. Okay, let's finish up here with my second trend, talking about the 49ers offense. I want to look specifically at this offense with Christian McCaffrey and Elijah Mitchell, both being healthy. It's not like Mitchell should be good to go this week by Ninja in the preseason. That happens a lot for him, but they're facing the Steelers in a game with a low total and both defenses are good. But it's also the 49ers with Christian McCaffrey and like we know what McCaffrey can do. So I wanted to dig in and see what their usage was like last year when they had both Mitchell and McCaffrey healthy and see what things looked like there. The 49ers last year played five games with McCaffrey, Mitchell and Devo Samuel all at full health and actually a week 18 because they didn't play the starters all four quarters in that game. But in that five game sample, McCaffrey and Mitchell both averaged exactly 11.4 carries per game. Not a huge concern for McCaffrey to not get a lot of carries because he's more so getting his work via the passing game. McCaffrey had 5.8 targets per game in that span. Now Brandon mentioned before adjust opportunities, that's carries plus two X targets and he was at 23 carries plus two X targets, which is lower than one for a salary of 92. McCaffrey averaged 85 yards from scrimmage per game, a max of 136 and only two games above 80. So I love Christian McCaffrey. I just don't love him this week at a salary of 92 with all these guys being healthy. That's kind of tough and that's scary, but I think it's, you know, that's that's tough. Not going to Mitchell either. Devo Samuel led the pass catchers with 7.6 targets per game. He averaged 81.8 yards from scrimmage per game. Just 12% of the team's red zone chances, which is not ideal, but of this group, I am most likely to be on Devo at $7,000. Brandon Ayuk, 5.6 targets per game. Kittle was at 3.8, neither guys, a low salary. So I don't really want to get there either. So honestly, even on a team that projects to be efficient, I'm having a hard time using anybody beyond Devo Samuel on this team. And even Devo won't be a core play for me, I don't think. So am I too low on McCaffrey specifically, but then the 49ers more broadly in your eyes? I don't like this game very much. We don't talk about like our season long teams, but I was doing drafts and I was, I just kind of get glad when people take the 49ers. I think this team is going to be one of those, those like offenses that we talk about a lot of shouldn't we be more in on them? And then it comes back to the, well, maybe things are a little more spread out than we would like the salaries kind of always seem to account for their ceilings. These guys have pretty big ceilings. I get that, but I'm probably going to be out on this team more often than not. I don't really, I'm just not tempted by much. Samuel at 7000 probably the most tempting just because his ceiling is pretty massive and the salaries reasonable, but I don't know. I'm also not looking to bring this one back with anything. So it's hard to, it's harder to have big games whenever the opposing offense isn't doing as much. Um, we like lock it more than Debo, I assume. Correct? Yeah. What about Amari versus Debo as a standalone play? Amari. I agree. So I think we're on the same page there where even though we are okay with Debo, probably not going to be a core play for us. Calvin Ridley. Calvin. Yeah. Okay. Indoors. Yeah. Do want to mention one thing quick here, Brandon. So you beat me in the bobble hat for golf. And as a result, I had to buy you two hats because I bobble hats are head to head lineup we do each week. And if the winner, if I win, I get a bobble head as you can see back here. If Brandon wins, he gets a hat. Um, and Brandon Brew was a fan of your hat. Um, it's an HBK hat. I don't know what that means. I know it's what you're wearing, but I don't know what that means, but you got brother stick around. So Brandon, uh, Brandon synergy, HBK synergy, you're keeping the viewers on tap. I'm surprised anyone tuned in or stayed tuned in after the intro, but yeah, glad to have you. Uh, whether for this week, there's nothing. I will say like from a broad perspective, the concerns for me at weather are once the wind gets to 10 miles per hour, that to me is a concern. Um, 15 miles per hour is like a whoa, nearly to kind of situation. Nothing for this week projects to be too bad. So we're okay for weather. So let's dive in now to our positional plays over on vandal.com for the week one main slate beginning at quarterback Brandon, who are you targeting this week? I'm going Justin Herbert. I'm sticking with it. Uh, I love Lamar as well, but I just want to kind of talk about Herbert, um, with the salary, you know, implied team total tied for slate high, um, game of the week and, um, the, the tight spread here. I know we have some potential concerns with Miami's pace, but this, this game screams back and forth, high scoring matchup. And that's basically what it is, uh, that leads to big games from quarterbacks. You need efficiency, not necessarily the volume. You gotta have the touchdowns, like a high in game touchdown rate. Super, super important. Talked about this already, but Justin Herbert flagged, uh, by, you know, my, my method here for touchdown regression, um, basically the standout, the poster boy for it, uh, this year, you know, middling past the offense overall, I'm fine with that. And in 11 games against teams that were, uh, just not elite against the pass, Herbert average 290 yards, just one and a half touchdowns per game. But again, that ties into the regression. Um, Miami also got torched on downfield passes. I think this team comes out fast, kind of makes a statement and it's a little scary not to have Lamar here, but for the salary, I think Herbert's a great play. My second love is Anthony Richardson, just based on like sort of the, the predictability and the ceilings that studs tend to have. We're not usually down in this range very often, but Richardson, I can't imagine his salary is going to be starting with a six for much longer. Uh, even if he comes out in struggles, uh, the rushing should be there. He's projected by pretty much every projection system to be top five in a rushing volume among quarterbacks for the season. Uh, you know, Indy at home. Um, the other underdogs, but it's indoors and Jacksonville can generate pressure, but that can kind of, you sure is going to lead to sacks, uh, but should lead to even more scrambling. Um, number fires model is projecting Richardson for a lot of rushing attempts and Jacksonville 22nd in rushing success rate allowed to quarterbacks last season. So I think it's, it's one of the best weeks we're going to get all season for quarterbacks with Anthony Richardson at 6700. I agree. I think that he is probably using my top three a quarterback considering salary for sure. That part I can say definitively. Um, and a guy we'll use for sure this week. My top play for this week, a quarterback is going to be Lamar Jackson. Now this is a high salary and a wide spread. And typically a quarterback, we want a tight spread because it implies the other opposing team is pushing back, but it's a new offense where they should be higher tempo than expected and than they were previously. And he's got much better pass catchers than before. The Texans, I think they might be better than expected. Um, so I don't think there's zero shootout potential here. Um, and again, I feel better about Lamar situation. Now I have a, in this all season, I cooked up a model that kind of like projects upside based on game environment at each position. So just looking at, you know, things that have been good for each position, uh, in past, in the past to predict upside games. So it does not consider the player, the way they scored their points, just looking at best overall game environment. And the best overall game environment for a quarterback this week in my model is the Baltimore Ravens offense. And that does not consider the fact Lamar runs a lot. So to me, I want to get to Lamar whenever I can. My second level quarterback for this week is going to be Joe Burrow. I'm definitely open to Richardson as a value play, but we've seen Burrow go nuclear even without, uh, running and he's been a guy who can pop into perfect lineups quite a bit. And I'm not expecting a ton of high upside quarterbacks this week because there's no Mahomes in the main slate, no Josh Allen on the main slate, no Jared Goff, the best quarterback in football on the main slate slide does impact things quite a bit for Joe Burrow. We have obvious stack candidates for him. We've got a running back. We can feel good about two if you want to toss that in. And $7,900 on the salary for Burrow, really a good number. So to me, I'm okay with Richardson, but I want to get to Lamar, want to get to Joe Burrow, because I think those two guys are in really good environments for this week. Let's move now to running back. Who you got there? Bejohn Robinson. 7,800 is the salary for his opening game. Um, you know, on paper, matchup, depending on what you look at could be a little tricky. But Carolina 26 and rushing yards over expectation per carry, a lot of backs can give up some bigger plays. Robinson has the ability to take advantage of that. Basically no chance that he's not heavily featured. Went back and looked at the tape, I know, but didn't watch a lot of the preseason and by a lot, I mean, none of it until I looked up some clips, but you know, four carries, 20 yards, 12 yard carry on his first touch, caught his lone target, was a red zone target. I think it was very close to the, to the red zone, if not, but by my calculations, a carrier target on five of 12 snaps. I'll take that any day of the week. Second love is Joe Mixon at a salary of 7,500. We talked about this game a lot. Kind of already laid out my case for Mixon throughout the show, but in his, you know, after his injury was basically in a 60-40 split, and people were kind of clamoring for more some odd JP run, even the 40% he was getting roughly. But last year, Nixon came out, played at least two thirds of the snaps in his first nine games on, like totally he played 73% of this team snaps. I feel like this salary is very, very reasonable for all of that considered. And my third love, it's going to be J.K. Dobbins. He's someone I always struggle with because the snap rate is typically low. That's just how Baltimore operates, but we're talking about extra play volume. That is all baked in. You know, snap rates, target shares, these all matter, but at some point you got to account for the volume that these percentages are tied to. Houston can get torched on the ground. They're probably going to get decimated in this game. J.K. Dobbins has a multi-touchdown upside if he gets the ball handed to him inside the five, which seems reasonable. So for 65, I think Dobbins is great, although, most are easily could have made my list here too. J.K. With Dobbins, I mentioned before that the Ravens quarterbacks lead in explosion potential in my model for this week. The running backs do too. So that's good for Dobbins as well. 65, do you like him? My first love is also a B-gen Robinson because we're getting a potential guy who could have a three down roll for $7,800, which is so hard to pass up. The Falcons are home favorites against team projected to rank about mid-pack against the rush based on my numbers. They're 12th, so above average, but right in that meaty middle. It's just really hard to pass up a potential three down back at this salary. So I love B-gen. I would say among the true two studs, Chubb is my favorite, but that's mostly because of the game stacks. My second love at running back is going to be Alexander Madison. There is some potential for Ty Chandler to steal work here because we don't really know what Madison's role will look like, but the Vikings gave Madison a decent chunk of money. They cut Daven Cooks. Their actions say they like Alexander Madison. He's had big workloads in the past with no Daven Cook. There is a thin depth chart behind him with Kenny and Wang Wu also out. He's on IR. They're at home against a defense that has lost some talents along the defensive line in the soft season. So Madison is 73. Another guy I feel good about for this week. My kind of value play at any position for this week is going to be Raheem Moster. No Jeff Wilson for this game. We know what Savon Ahmed is. Devon A-chain could be really fun, but he also missed time in training camp with an injury and that's a tough spot to be in for a rookie. I'm skeptical of this game as a whole, but does have a high total, does have a tight spread. Looking at games last year with no Jeff Wilson where Moster was fully healthy, Wilson missed most of week 14 and all week 14, all week 15. In those two games, Moster at snap rate was 74% and 77%. He had 156 yards in scrimmage in the second game in that span. So I think things line up really well for Raheem Moster. His salary is $5,900. So that does add into our overall approach this week of spend down a running back and use those savings to get to the stud past catchers and quarterbacks on this slate. Let's go now to wide receiver, Brandon. You're beginning things with my other favorite stud of the week, I would say at any position. That's Jamar Chase. What drew you towards Chase at 85? Yeah, we have some running back value and that's important. I want to be able to use that to get upside or other positions, but Chase and that, you know, it were sort of the second best game of the week or at least technically the second best game of the week by over under huge salary savings from Justin Jefferson as well. But, you know, we at least I'll take the I'll take the blame on this one, but we used to kind of joke that T Higgins was like the the one or like the one a in this offense for a little bit. That is definitely not the case. Chase is the guy in games where they both played at least half the snaps 98% route rate for Chase 9.9 targets with just 27% target share there 4.4 downfield targets, so at least 10 yards downfield. And those are very valuable targets compared to shorter targets, something to think about as you're building your lineups this week. One and a half red zone targets for a team best 25% red zone share carved up the Browns as well. And they're, you know, his only game against them for 119 yards in a touchdown. But I want to use the savings that we have at potentially quarterback running back maybe tight end to make sure I'm getting access to high ceiling receivers that would also include, I know we kind of glossed over them, but Tyree Kill and Jaylen Waddle, I want to shot them out, make sure that nobody thinks I'm glossing over them. But also like Tyler Lockett, if we're bumping down into 6000 range is 6,800 season long outlook for Lockett could be, you know, maybe he starts to wind down a bit as this team gets JSN a little bit more involved. But he's coming back from a wrist injury and might not be fully up to speed. But Lockett in two games against the Rams last year, nine and a half targets, six and a half catches 91 yards in a touchdown on a per game basis. Volume should be there. So I think Lockett's a great play in the mid range for this week. And my third love going down into the salary range, Cortland Sutton at 59, especially if Jerry Judy does not play. If he does, and I get a little nervous, I'll go to Nico Collins at 58, but Sutton, he's still a really good receiver. I don't think a lot of the struggles were sort of his fault. But in the event that Judy doesn't play, here's basically what we got last year, 96% route rate, 92% of the snaps, 9.3 targets, 86 yards per game, no touchdowns, but almost a 30% target share, tons of area yards. So if Judy is either out worse expected to be limited, Cortland Sutton deserves a lot of attention. Yeah. And I think the Sutton is a premier value play on this slate if we get no Judy, given just that volume could be insane. I also have Jamar Chase is my top stud at wide receiver. It's a tremendous gain to stack. It gets you a somewhat similar projection to Justin Jefferson for $1,000 less than salary. Now I would say Jefferson at 95 also totally fine. It's not like an anti-Jefferson thing. It's a, I liked Jamar Chase too. So again, maybe if you want to go crazy, Port Canola is still a situation once again. If we look at the games where T was fully healthy last year, Chase had a 27% overall target share and 38% of the deep work. And with all the value or mid range running backs, I can probably get there for this week. Second love is Amari Cooper. I do like this side of the game too. After Deshaun Watson took over last year, Cooper had a 25% overall target share with 36% of the deep work. Now they did bring in Elijah Moore and that could take away some of the target share, but I think Cooper's pretty solid. I'm a little bit lower on Elijah more than most. And it also could mean that they're going to be more past heavy than they were last year, which would be beneficial too, especially with the weather, ideally not being as bad as it was. So for 67, I liked Cooper a lot. Now you talked about Coralton Sutton. So I'll talk about Nico Collins just in case we do get Judy playing. I don't think he will, but like just in case, Collins last year in the games he played, even if you include the ones where he played alongside Brandon Cooks, 19.1% target share, actually the higher target share than Cooks, although Cooks did miss one of those games. That's actually not fair. But like, you know, 19.1% of the games he played, and it was in the games he played without Cooks. I think it was like 26%. So pretty good number there. Collins got a decent amount of deep work. He had six deep targets in one game alone, five in week number two as well, and now should have a better situation at quarterback with CJ Stroud and play. Marlon Humphrey is not going to play in this game for the Ravens. So I think that Nico Collins, both as they bring back and potentially as a standalone play, if Jerry Judy does go, that's totally fine by me. Moving now to tight end. Who stands out to you there? I'm going with Mark Andrews here. I think that we have, again, ways to save salary. We can afford to roster Andrews and Lamar, get those stacks, those high upside stacks. My model, my simulation model has Andrews just under 30% likely to get the 15 Fandal points. T. J. Hawkinson's around 20% and then nobody else is above 15%. So you don't need the simulations to know that Andrews has the breakaway potential, but it's definitely there. 28% target share through week 12 last year with Lamar Jackson. There's a little bit of a health concern, but it doesn't seem like it's anything to worry too much about. Texans worse than average in yards per route run. About average and adjusted Fandal points allowed to tight ends last year. So I think that Lamar Andrews stacks very, very appealing, very, very doable this week, but on the complete opposite end of the spectrum, we won't be alone in this, but Tyler Higby at a salary of 5,300 with Cooper cup ruled out in games without cup last season. Higby 22% target share, you know, not a whole lot of results based on that, but that was with the catch rate over expectation of again, negative 8.8%. It's going to get better. He's going to kind of, again, we don't talk about floor, but the floor is going to be a little bit more elevated based on that target volume. And it's just not going to stay that bad forever. So if you're betting against Andrews and Hawkinson basically having huge games, then Higby makes a lot of sense. I think Higby's fine. I'm okay going there. If I'm trying to differentiate from Higby in the mid range, I'd go have an Engram at 58. He is reasonably salaried at a $5,800 playing indoors in a game that is kind of fun for stacking. Calvin Ridley is in the mix now and I prefer Ridley at 7,000 over Engram from getting exposure to the Jags. But Engram earned a new contract this off season. He's not, he didn't get a ton of high leverage work, but I think that's the biggest issue with him. $5,800. I like the situation for Engram quite a bit. Other guy is Luke Musgrave. He's basically an every down player with the first team in the preseason. Christian Watson, Romeo Dobbs are banged up now. The Bears defense will not be good. So Engram or Musgrave checks a lot of boxes at $4,500. And I want to get to Andrews, but like, you know, if I want to have some fun and jam in, Jamar Chase and Justin Jefferson, maybe Luke Musgrave is the key to doing that there. Let's finish up with defense. Who are you focusing on there? Yeah, we're always trying to save some salary defense. So I'm going to go with the Packers at a $4,100 salary. Justin Fields can take a lot of sacks by far the highest sack rate of any player. Look, we talked about this, I think we made it a trend once, but you don't just want low totals for opposing offenses. You want sacks and interceptions. That's basically where the majority fandal points come from. Sure, if they also get tagged with like giving up 40 points, that's a negative, but there should be some sacks here as this offense in Chicago is still kind of figuring things out. Yeah, I think that they make some sense as a contrarian play, given that they're underdogs in this game. So like, but like it's a tight spread. I think that makes sense there. My first love is the Broncos or first love only love is the Broncos. Because the raiders have had weird vibes all off season and like all DFS decisions should be made based on vibes. That's just the way it boils down to it. Jimmy G doesn't tend to make a lot of mistakes at quarterback, but the offensive line here is not good. The Broncos defense did lose its DC, which you know, could be a loss because he's seen very smart, but they played well last year. So $4,000 first game for Sean Payton. I think there's enough here to make the Broncos at least in ticing with a salary of $4,000. That's all we got here for this week on the heat check fantasy podcast, Brandon, any final thoughts for the good people before we send them off to fill out their hopefully winning lineups. I think we covered everything. This is a long one, but week one always tends to be because there's a lot to catch up on. Probably the only thing I'm really thinking about now is got to make sure I get some Justin Jefferson. Yeah. I mean, that's fair. It's obvious, but you got to prioritize it as well, because it changes things around. It definitely does. For me, it's kind of going through the running backs and deciding which guys are your priorities, which guys are you okay making your player pool. Like you're going to have some tough decisions like, you know, maybe not being on Austin Neckler or Christian McCaffrey as much as everyone else. But I think it's a different week this week, given all the potential for good value at running back that we have. That's all we got here for today. As a reminder, make sure you're subscribed to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcasts. You can also find us on the Fandall YouTube page and Fandall TV Plus. I'll be back with you on Monday to recap all the big takeaways from week number one, Brandon. People have questions for you on Twitter. Where can they find you there? I'm on Twitter at Gadoula13, and I'm on Twitter at Jim Saunders, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow Fandall Research at Fandall Research. And don't forget the free play. The free role for everyone is out there. Fandall.com slash research to find a post to get the link for the free play. Good luck to all of you in week number one. Go win yourself some money. We'll talk to you once again on Monday. This has been the Heat Check Fantasy podcast right here on Fandall Research.